Kudos to NY Times - Call to end legacy Admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

LOL, what we have now is extreme.. a complete sham, cluster you know what. No transparency. Heck a lottery would be better!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We disagree that legacy is a bad thing. We have no problem with it. If family members have a history and heritage of attending and supporting a school then that should be rewarded in the admissions process, especially private schools.

FWIW we have 4 kids in college. Our kids do NOT go to our Big 10 school and instead go to 3 different Ivies where, obviously, they didn't receive any preferential admissions treatment since they are not legacies.

That's a fair point.

One the NYT should appreciate as they continue to be managed by one same legacy family since the 19th Century.

Isn’t the NYT a privately owned business? Are you suggesting that a privately owned business should not be allowed to choose their own management team?
How would that be done?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

How about have just one test that all the kids take? It could be given on one day so no one has an advantage over anyone else, and then kids could be assigned to schools according to their scores on this one test. How does that sound?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

How about have just one test that all the kids take? It could be given on one day so no one has an advantage over anyone else, and then kids could be assigned to schools according to their scores on this one test. How does that sound?

That's the French, Brit, Indian and Chinese system right?

We should consider it here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We disagree that legacy is a bad thing. We have no problem with it. If family members have a history and heritage of attending and supporting a school then that should be rewarded in the admissions process, especially private schools.

FWIW we have 4 kids in college. Our kids do NOT go to our Big 10 school and instead go to 3 different Ivies where, obviously, they didn't receive any preferential admissions treatment since they are not legacies.

That's a fair point.

One the NYT should appreciate as they continue to be managed by one same legacy family since the 19th Century.

Isn’t the NYT a privately owned business? Are you suggesting that a privately owned business should not be allowed to choose their own management team?
How would that be done?

Nope, the NYT is a public company, same as Exxon or Apple.

The funny thing is that a public company run by a legacy family is telling private universities they should not use legacy as a criteria...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We disagree that legacy is a bad thing. We have no problem with it. If family members have a history and heritage of attending and supporting a school then that should be rewarded in the admissions process, especially private schools.

FWIW we have 4 kids in college. Our kids do NOT go to our Big 10 school and instead go to 3 different Ivies where, obviously, they didn't receive any preferential admissions treatment since they are not legacies.

That's a fair point.

One the NYT should appreciate as they continue to be managed by one same legacy family since the 19th Century.

Isn’t the NYT a privately owned business? Are you suggesting that a privately owned business should not be allowed to choose their own management team?
How would that be done?

Nope, the NYT is a public company, same as Exxon or Apple.

The funny thing is that a public company run by a legacy family is telling private universities they should not use legacy as a criteria...

Public? As in owned by the government? Or public, as in privately owned by people who have bought shares in the business? And then the shareowners have a say in how their privately owned business is run?

Who do you think should be choosing the management team of a business other than the owners of that business?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

How about have just one test that all the kids take? It could be given on one day so no one has an advantage over anyone else, and then kids could be assigned to schools according to their scores on this one test. How does that sound?

That's the French, Brit, Indian and Chinese system right?

We should consider it here.

All three of those systems have deep problems with corruption. People bribe and pay off test centers, graders, etc. It's no panacea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We disagree that legacy is a bad thing. We have no problem with it. If family members have a history and heritage of attending and supporting a school then that should be rewarded in the admissions process, especially private schools.

FWIW we have 4 kids in college. Our kids do NOT go to our Big 10 school and instead go to 3 different Ivies where, obviously, they didn't receive any preferential admissions treatment since they are not legacies.

That's a fair point.

One the NYT should appreciate as they continue to be managed by one same legacy family since the 19th Century.

Isn’t the NYT a privately owned business? Are you suggesting that a privately owned business should not be allowed to choose their own management team?
How would that be done?

Nope, the NYT is a public company, same as Exxon or Apple.

The funny thing is that a public company run by a legacy family is telling private universities they should not use legacy as a criteria...

Public? As in owned by the government? Or public, as in privately owned by people who have bought shares in the business? And then the shareowners have a say in how their privately owned business is run?

Who do you think should be choosing the management team of a business other than the owners of that business?

There is one weirdo who keeps posting about how The NY Times is family owned. Not sure what that has to do with anything. Walmart is similar and run by the Walton family. College admissions is completely different especially with all the federal and state funds colleges and universities receive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

How about have just one test that all the kids take? It could be given on one day so no one has an advantage over anyone else, and then kids could be assigned to schools according to their scores on this one test. How does that sound?

Nothing like having your entire life be dictated by one horrible test. God forbid you get sick halfway through or a parent dies two days prior. I have friends who grew up in Ireland and were subjected to the "one giant test" system. They didn't do as well as they thought they would, so instead of university, they basically had to go to the Irish equivalent of community college. Their "higher education" did not match their intelligence and potential.

Additionally, lower income minority students tend to do better in school (grades, activities, athletics) than they do on tests. One exam to pass or fail would certainly hurt their chances of climbing the educational ladder even more than the SAT/ACT does now.

[Anonymous]

I am hoping to now benefit from legacy admits. I was a first-gen college student, now dutifully making my small but ongoing donations for the past 15 years to Georgetown. Don't f'ing take away my kid's shot!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

How about have just one test that all the kids take? It could be given on one day so no one has an advantage over anyone else, and then kids could be assigned to schools according to their scores on this one test. How does that sound?

Nothing like having your entire life be dictated by one horrible test. God forbid you get sick halfway through or a parent dies two days prior. I have friends who grew up in Ireland and were subjected to the "one giant test" system. They didn't do as well as they thought they would, so instead of university, they basically had to go to the Irish equivalent of community college. Their "higher education" did not match their intelligence and potential.

Additionally, lower income minority students tend to do better in school (grades, activities, athletics) than they do on tests. One exam to pass or fail would certainly hurt their chances of climbing the educational ladder even more than the SAT/ACT does now.

And? My DD's complete math path was decided when she was in 3rd grade. Why is it any better to use grades? Do grades determine work performance or competence? Also, because you have a bad test day doesn't mean you don't have a career or a future. Getting in an Ivy or top school should not be the only way to gauge a successful life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

How about have just one test that all the kids take? It could be given on one day so no one has an advantage over anyone else, and then kids could be assigned to schools according to their scores on this one test. How does that sound?

That's the French, Brit, Indian and Chinese system right?

We should consider it here.

I don’t know about the French, but I don’t think the Brits have one test on one day that determines who gets to go to which college/university. I know they have a system that involves a number of tests in chosen subject areas, but I’ve never heard of them having one big test on one day that everyone in a particular year group must take to be considered for any college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am hoping to now benefit from legacy admits. I was a first-gen college student, now dutifully making my small but ongoing donations for the past 15 years to Georgetown. Don't f'ing take away my kid's shot!

How is your kid more deserving?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End all preferences... That is all...

End all racial preferences and legacy preferences.

Yup.

Focus admissions on merit and colleges on learning.

A revolutionary concept I know.

Speaking of preferences, is it just a coincidence that the last name of the NYT Publisher today is the same as that of the Founder?

Athletic too, do away with the essay (crap, means nothing), do away with fake community service boosts, all of that stuff.

Perhaps only grades, or only test scores, or some new test or all of those combined but thats it. No name on the app, no background, nothing... Just assign a number.

Sounds extreme, but perhaps the most fair system of all.

Don't UC and foreign schools do that essentially? Or that plus the essays?

How about have just one test that all the kids take? It could be given on one day so no one has an advantage over anyone else, and then kids could be assigned to schools according to their scores on this one test. How does that sound?

That's the French, Brit, Indian and Chinese system right?

We should consider it here.

All three of those systems have deep problems with corruption. People bribe and pay off test centers, graders, etc. It's no panacea.

I count four there...

US schools would really benefit from a simple yet universal math exam